JUST BE YOURSELF, AMERICA

Neil Spitzer, associate editor of the Wilson Quarterly at the Smithsonian Institution in WashingtonCHICAGO TRIBUNE

Americans have mixed feelings about the Prince and Princess of Wales, who begin their five-day visit to the United States on Saturday.

On the one hand, they love to see royalty, to be entertained by it. We can imagine the ''photo opportunities'' already: the Princess of Wales comforting the terminally ill at the Washington Home and Hospice; the Prince of Wales playing polo in Palm Beach; and both of them sipping coffee at the White House with President Reagan and Nancy.

But Americans do not really believe in royalty. They feel about princes and princesses the way some people feel about having children: It`s wonderful . . . for somebody else. Most Americans still hold to Jefferson`s ''leveling principles'' of democracy, and reject the notion of unearned privilege. That`s why the royal visit is bound to be tainted by ''incidents,'' in which Charles and Diana find themselves being treated like anyone else.

Such incidents have happened before. In 1924, the 30-year-old Prince Edward made what one journalist described as ''a whirlwind round of dances and parties'' through the Unites States. Many Americans refused to take him too seriously. ''The prince is a good kid,'' comedian Will Rogers said. ''Too bad I can`t afford to carry a guy like that around with me. I`d have a swell act if I could.''

The American press exhibited the same irreverent attitude when the Nixon White House was host to Prince Charles and Princess Anne in 1970. ''Good ole Charley Windsor,'' the New York Sunday News enthused, is ''a young feller who`s really as common as a new shoe.''

New York`s press, however, is gentler than the city`s spirited mayor, Edward Koch. During Prince Charles` June, 1981, visit to the Big Apple, Koch divulged the prince`s private remark that he hoped British troops would one day withdraw from Northern Ireland. The incident roused the ire (and humor) of Fleet Street`s sensationalistic papers. ''Mayor Mouth,'' the Daily Express railed, had courted the Irish vote ''at the expense of a man whose boots he is not fit to clean.''

Undaunted by the stature of royalty, Koch later pointed out to news reporters that ''Charles'' was going bald. Fortunately, Koch`s conduct was not typical. Americans usually commit faux pas with good intentions. In 1983, at the San Diego Museum of Art, councilman Bill Cleator meant to give Queen Elizabeth a polite boost up to the podium when he took her by the arm. Instead, he offended her; royalty of course, must never be touched.

Nor should it be kissed. But how was former President Jimmy Carter supposed to know that, when he planted his lips, family-style, on those of the Queen Mother several years ago? Carter was just trying to be friendly, but the Queen considered the act a crime and (according to one expert on the royal family) has scorned the former chief executive ever since.

What can be done to avoid such gaffes and goof-ups? Not much, I`m afraid. DeBrett`s ''Etiquette and Modern Manners'' describes how to behave with royalty, but who could ever learn all the rules? ''If the Royal hand is extended,'' DeBrett`s says, ''take it lightly and briefly, at the same time executing a brief bob with the weight on the front foot, or a bow from the neck--not from the waist.''

Americans, I would suggest, should just be themselves and suffer the consequences, which sometimes are pretty good. In 1954, for example, a young Harlem boy met the Queen Mother and said, ''Hey, ain`t you the Queen Mom?''

The boy`s remark charmed the British public, and she has been known, affectionately, as the ''Queen Mum'' ever since.